Cargando…
Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients
OBJECTIVE: The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 (WRFQ), measuring the percentage of time a worker has difficulties in meeting the work demands for a given health state, has shown strong reliability and validity in various populations with different chronic conditions. The present study aims t...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8365733/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33538368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13420 |
_version_ | 1783738768894722048 |
---|---|
author | Dorland, Heleen F. Abma, Femke I. Roelen, Corné A. M. Bültmann, Ute Amick, Benjamin C. |
author_facet | Dorland, Heleen F. Abma, Femke I. Roelen, Corné A. M. Bültmann, Ute Amick, Benjamin C. |
author_sort | Dorland, Heleen F. |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 (WRFQ), measuring the percentage of time a worker has difficulties in meeting the work demands for a given health state, has shown strong reliability and validity in various populations with different chronic conditions. The present study aims to validate the WRFQ in working cancer patients. METHODS: A validation study of the WRFQ 2.0 was conducted, using baseline data from the longitudinal Work Life after Cancer study. Structural validity (Confirmatory Factor Analysis, CFA), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and discriminant validity (hypothesis testing) were evaluated. RESULTS: 352 working cancer patients, most of them diagnosed with breast cancer (48%) and 58% in a job with mainly non‐manual tasks, showed a mean WRFQ score of 78.6 (SD = 17.1), which means that they had on average difficulties for 78.6% of the time they spent working. Good internal consistency (α = 0.96) and acceptable to good fit for both the four and five‐factor model (CFA) was found. The WRFQ distinguished between cancer patients reporting good vs. poor health (80.3 vs. 73.0, p = 0.001), low vs. high fatigue (82.0 vs. 72.2, p < 0.001), no vs. clinical depression (80.4 vs. 58.8, p < 0.001) and low vs. high cognitive symptoms (86.1 vs. 64.7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The WRFQ 2.0 is a reliable and valid instrument to measure work functioning in working cancer patients. Further psychometric research on responsiveness is needed to support its use in health practice. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8365733 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83657332021-08-23 Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients Dorland, Heleen F. Abma, Femke I. Roelen, Corné A. M. Bültmann, Ute Amick, Benjamin C. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) Original Articles OBJECTIVE: The Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 (WRFQ), measuring the percentage of time a worker has difficulties in meeting the work demands for a given health state, has shown strong reliability and validity in various populations with different chronic conditions. The present study aims to validate the WRFQ in working cancer patients. METHODS: A validation study of the WRFQ 2.0 was conducted, using baseline data from the longitudinal Work Life after Cancer study. Structural validity (Confirmatory Factor Analysis, CFA), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) and discriminant validity (hypothesis testing) were evaluated. RESULTS: 352 working cancer patients, most of them diagnosed with breast cancer (48%) and 58% in a job with mainly non‐manual tasks, showed a mean WRFQ score of 78.6 (SD = 17.1), which means that they had on average difficulties for 78.6% of the time they spent working. Good internal consistency (α = 0.96) and acceptable to good fit for both the four and five‐factor model (CFA) was found. The WRFQ distinguished between cancer patients reporting good vs. poor health (80.3 vs. 73.0, p = 0.001), low vs. high fatigue (82.0 vs. 72.2, p < 0.001), no vs. clinical depression (80.4 vs. 58.8, p < 0.001) and low vs. high cognitive symptoms (86.1 vs. 64.7, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The WRFQ 2.0 is a reliable and valid instrument to measure work functioning in working cancer patients. Further psychometric research on responsiveness is needed to support its use in health practice. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-02-04 2021-07 /pmc/articles/PMC8365733/ /pubmed/33538368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13420 Text en © 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Cancer Care published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Dorland, Heleen F. Abma, Femke I. Roelen, Corné A. M. Bültmann, Ute Amick, Benjamin C. Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients |
title | Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients |
title_full | Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients |
title_fullStr | Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients |
title_full_unstemmed | Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients |
title_short | Validation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients |
title_sort | validation of the work role functioning questionnaire 2.0 in cancer patients |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8365733/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33538368 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13420 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dorlandheleenf validationoftheworkrolefunctioningquestionnaire20incancerpatients AT abmafemkei validationoftheworkrolefunctioningquestionnaire20incancerpatients AT roelencorneam validationoftheworkrolefunctioningquestionnaire20incancerpatients AT bultmannute validationoftheworkrolefunctioningquestionnaire20incancerpatients AT amickbenjaminc validationoftheworkrolefunctioningquestionnaire20incancerpatients |